creepypastafandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:DoctorBleed
Welcome Hi, welcome to Creepypasta Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the File:2-Millas Dance Party Vault 1 1.jpg page. Please be sure to check out all the Site Rules, as it is important to follow them. Failure to abide by them may result in your account being blocked. Read some new pastas by checking out or browse by topic by checking out the Genre Listing. Look at what our editors have written at the User Submissions page. If you upload OC (Original Content, or something that you wrote instead of found on the Internet), be sure to tag it with the Category:OC category AND add it to the User Submissions page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! CrashingCymbal (talk) 12:53, January 3, 2014 (UTC) JtK: Personal Judging Results As the Top 5 for the JtK Contest you entered were announced, you may have been wondering as to why your story did not quite make it into the poll. While I cannot speak on the behalf of the other judges, I can show you some of my short, personal notes that I took for each story. They are as follows: I think that the problem with this one is just it hasn’t been proofread real well. There are plot holes and grammar mistakes, but honestly, the approach and sympathy for Jeff’s character and the fact that it does come from the viewpoint of one of the bullies gives it a more fresh feeling. Hope this helps. AGrimAuxiliatrix1 (talk) 22:17, November 21, 2015 (UTC) You know what would have really helped? If this weren't the way I found out I wasn't in the top five. Ugh. Huge disapointment, I really loved that story and I had a lot of fun writing it. I knew there was stiff competition but I didn't think a few grammatrical errors (which is an editoral problem, not a writing problem - you can feel free to disagree and I'm sure many here do but that's my view on the situation.) would spoil it. You mention plot holes but don't say what they are. I would like to know so maybe I could avoid those pitfalls next time I write a story or even try to explain how they're supposed to be interpreted. If I come off belidgerent or rude just know it's because I just now ''find out about this after waiting two months for the contest results on top of what was already a really bad week for me. I'm quite livid, but I'm still trying to be polite. DoctorBleed (talk) 05:24, November 22, 2015 (UTC) :Seriously? They reviewed 15 stories (not including the dozen we removed before-hand) and even bothered to provide at least a little criticism of your story and your first reaction is to respond petulantly that they weren't more in-depth after reading that much? Ask them about the issues rather they found rather than responding like a child who was just turned down a toy. Chances are, it was those "grammatrical errors" and your decision not to adequately proof-read that resulted in you being excluded from the listing. :Finally, your statement: "which is an editoral problem, not a writing problem" is very disconcerting. You do realize that the onus is on you as an author to make sure your story is up to standards. Very few people are actually going to help you if you can't even be bothered to work on your own story. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 05:34, November 22, 2015 (UTC) :I was hearing you out right up until up the little "child" remark. :If you're going to talk down like a snobbish, condescending prick to me I'm not going to bother taking you seriously. It's a shame because you made a few good points and I was willing to listen, but you had to act like a complete jerk. :I don't know what about my response made you so angry but clearly by being expressing emotion I've somehow committed an offense against you, personally. Somehow. :I'll make a blog post tomorrow expressing my full thoughts on the subject. I though maybe I could discuss them civilly with you but apparently you're too busy acting like a snob to talk to mean like a normal person instead of a child you're lecturing. I'm not interested in playing house with you, so good day. DoctorBleed (talk) 05:45, November 22, 2015 (UTC) ::Not really, the fact that there are multiple punctuation, capitalization, and punctuation issues in your story and you decided that you 'you didn't think a few grammatrical errors (which is an editoral problem, not a writing problem - ... would spoil it' was more an editorial issue than your own upset me. ::Fact is, I'm upset that you bothered to submit a story with this many issues without even deciding to proof-read it and the tone you've take after posting it is frankly shameful. Especially considering the fact that multiple people have sought help for their story and you declined that opportunity. It wasn't until you found out you weren't selected that you decided to throw a temper-tantrum that drew my attention. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 05:51, November 22, 2015 (UTC) ::With all due respect I'm sincerely disinterested in what you have to say. In the very short time I've spoken to you, you've done nothing but act like an angry, bratty troll with a near-terminal superiority complex and severe control issues. You are either a troll or a brat. Either way, I'm done talking to you completely. Please go away. DoctorBleed (talk) 06:10, November 22, 2015 (UTC) JtK Submission Review To start this off I had five marking criterions: Creativity, Realism, True to the Original, Spelling and Grammar, and Audience Engagement. Each criterion was worth a total of 20 marks, bringing the total marks that could be earned out of 100. I will not be posting the rating of any story in any contestant's review. The summary notes I posted to justify my judging results were as follows (they're negative because I needed to justify my deduction of points, not explain why I added points): :1) The use of a ghost narrator for the story damaged the realism, however, as a creative storytelling method it is acceptable. :2) The text lacked a lot of subtlety, all of the major points of climax were already told to the reader before they happened (ie Lisa's death). Which had a serious impact on the suspense (mainly negating it as we knew what was going to happen). :3) There were a number of grammatical errors, just enough to warrant the minimum deduction. :4) The Slenderman Mythos reference was also prohibited by the original guidelines of the contest (as it is not a part of the original story). '''Overall' ---- When judging I keep to a list of criterions that does not allow me to voice my personal thoughts and feelings about the text. I stick to what the text is, no personal thoughts and feelings attached. Hence why I'm doing this 'overall' segment. This is where I voice my personal thoughts and feelings towards the story. The first thing I have to say about the text is that it was immersive and was able to hold my attention longer than a number of the entries. I had to deduct points for the use of a ghost narrator, as it damaged the realism, but that was leveled out by the points the use of a ghost narrator earned in the creative component. One of the most unique aspects of your text was that it was from Keith (one of the bullies) point of view. Not only that, but it was from the perspective of a person who had died as they recount what had lead them to their demise. The foreshadowing was interesting as a means to build up the sense of 'we know they will die, it's just a matter of when and how' (dread), but the characters weren't all built up enough to make me (as a reader) care enough that they were being killed. In a way, the foreshadowing also made the text a lot less subtle and broke the immersion of the reader. It's like watching a movie next to someone who has already seen it and they start spoiling all the points of climax for you (ie she's going to die, the dinosaur saves them in the end, he gets killed by Hank in five minutes, etc). There was also the reference to the Slenderverse '... he was into Slenderman mythos...' (This quote also highlights an example of a grammatical error found in the text: '... the Slenderman Mythos...') which was a direct violation of this rule: 'No Slenderman or any other Slenderverse lore is allowed...' (quote from the original contest post). This reference did let you down, as (rather than rate the entry as 0 for breaking the rules) I chose to deduct the minimum possible amount of marks from the piece (I marked in 5s). I quite enjoyed your reasoning behind Jeff's appearance as well. That was very clever and something I never saw coming. It also ties in well with the fact that if the dead (Jeff) can come back, then logically Keith would be able to return to recount his story (hopefully that was the direction you were going and not just me overthinking things). The plot, however, deviated quite far from the original story and I had a criterion for the text being 'True to the Original' (as this was a 're-write' contest and not a 'write a new story' contest). The majority of the important things (ie names and likenesses) were kept the same however, thus the grade didn't suffer too badly. Overall, it was a pleasant story to read and I believe it scored quite highly. In fact, upon checking, it did score quite highly (a number that I'm probably not allowed to specify off of being a finalist). I commend you on your use of creativity in the story and on submitting such an interesting work in a contest with such difficult and demanding controls and constraints. I hope this review helped and good luck in your writing adventure! Oaura (talk) 07:07, November 22, 2015 (UTC) Wow, you know, to be honest, I'm a pretty thin-skinned person and I thought this would upset me, but I actually really enjoyed hearing this critique and I can't really disagree with any of it. The only thing I don't agree with is the Slenderman thing and that's because I asked Underscore if it would be okay and he said yes. Other than that, yeah. An awesome critique and it actually makes me feel better. Thanks! DoctorBleed (talk) 07:28, November 22, 2015 (UTC) :As the 'head judge', I thought I should jump in to clarify something. I remember you asking about the Slenderman thing in the blog. What you received wasn't a "it's ok to use Slenderman" response, but a "use it, but you have to pull it off". Personally, I didn't deduct any points for that, but it was risky. :If you want I can try and give you a review myself, but the other judges already covered what I had to say. In the end, what cost you the place on the top-5 was the grammatical issues. It wasn't terrible, but it was enough to deduct a couple of points. And believe me, in the end, the race for the fifth place was much closer than I would have liked. I probably shouldn't tell you this, but you didn't reach the top five by just half a point. I am pretty ashamed of it, but when I found that this was the case, I was thinking of adding half a point to your score to draw you with the fifth. But that would have been immoral and unethical as a judge, so I just let the scores be as they originally were. :Honestly, your story was one of the best out there. It was extremely close, and I'm sorry for that. Anyway, well done for a very good story. It just wasn't your lucky day. I'm looking forward to seeing future stories of yours, so when you come up with something, please let me know on my talk page. Have a nice day. MrDupin (talk) 14:12, November 22, 2015 (UTC) :You probably should have kept that "half a point" thing secret because that actually is pretty heartbreaking. :But at the end of the day, hey, I made a story that entertained people, and that's the most important thing. Thanks, MrDupin. DoctorBleed (talk) 19:53, November 22, 2015 (UTC) EmpyrealInvective (talk) 04:53, May 27, 2016 (UTC) Categories While it's important to be proactive with your stories, adding categories that directly conflict is not the best approach when describing a singular entity. For example, how can something fit into the classification of: "Beings", "Demon/Devil", "Gods", and "Monsters" and still really be descriptive/focus on a singular entity as those four separate ideas all imply different concepts/entities (it'd be like comparing a slasher movie to a possession/haunted woods story) All tell a different story and trying to combine them into a single idea comes across as being overly vague/non-descriptive in describing/labeling the entity. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 08:47, May 27, 2016 (UTC) :You are now banned for a day for violating the category rules after being warned. Further infractions will result in lengthier bans. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 17:09, May 27, 2016 (UTC) ::Here's what the original link says about categorization: "Ghosts, Monsters, Demon/Devil, Beings, Gods, and Cryptids are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE categories. This means you can classify a page as Ghosts, but none of the others. Same goes for the rest." Here's a link to you adding "demons/devils" onto a story categorizing the entities as "beings". I strongly suggest clicking and reading links when you are warned for violating the site rules. ::I also suggest reading the section below that one (titled "Categories" that is right above this one) after you asked if those two categories could be added together. I'll wrap it up with this, if you are confused about something ask. I responded within a pretty reasonable amount of time and if you were still confused about it, I could have tried to simplify it further. Violating the same rule twice is not a good idea. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 03:40, May 29, 2016 (UTC) I already did that. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 05:40, May 29, 2016 (UTC) EmpyrealInvective (talk) 19:52, July 9, 2016 (UTC) Re: Yes, a lack of explanation can be a bad thing if you don't necessarily leave plot breadcrumbs or things for the audience to imply to come to their own conclusions about the mystery. Assuming that they'll make these connections on their own without any influence really doesn't create a good sense of story telling. It would be like saying someone saw a monster and that the audience needs to imagine what the monster looks like without any starting place. You can argue that their imaginations are much more effective, but without an idea of where to start, it just comes off as a fill-in-the-blank story. It can be effective to give them pieces of description and not be overly descriptive, but starving them of content is almost never a good idea. There's a saying that someone told me once that I'll just leave here: "A little mystery in a story is intriguing, too much is frustrating." Really reading that message within your story, I got zero of what you are now explaining with the addendum on my talk page. That is not a good starting point if the audience is really unable to come to the same conclusions (or their own) without a tertiary message explaining the plot. Additionally while you can restrict the plot to develop a sense of mysteriousness/intrigue, this: "Please come find me i am dead not much left OF me sick of suffering please shut off this machine want to die trapped in a husk I cannot move it burn s all over brain wired to a computer don't know where i AM they are not doctors not a hospital some kind of lab trace this message please find me pull the plug end this." really doesn't do that. First, it doesn't really convey much. All I got from that was that he was trapped in a lab with computers hooked up to his brain and he wants to die. Really including implications of what they're doing to him would have made the story stronger/more interesting instead of just leaving it at "I cannot move, it burns all over". EmpyrealInvective (talk) 23:59, July 9, 2016 (UTC) :I'm sorry, but the appeal is for contesting stories as it's mentioned in the header ("Please note that this is not a place to ask why your story was deleted; it's for contesting deletions. If you'd like feedback on your story and/or specific reasons as to why it was deleted, you can try posting it on the writing help forum." and "Also note that almost every story is deleted for a reason (typically due to it not being up to quality standards), making a deletion appeal without having a revised copy of the story in pastebin or having a link to the re-worked version on the writer's workshop will likely result in your story being denied and the administrator pointing out the reasons why they deleted the story.") We really don't support the idea of multiple appeals for the same story as it fosters a sense of keep at it until you wear them down or the story squeaks by. Going in to the appeal with a revised copy would have been a much better idea (as the header suggests). You can try re-writing your story from the ground up and making another appeal but a lot of the story issues described there still stand with the premise itself. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 00:15, July 10, 2016 (UTC) ::You can, that being said, I pointed out a lot of issues with the premise itself that would likely carry over (the overused hidden message trope for example) in most renditions which would likely weaken any subsequent appeal. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 00:24, July 10, 2016 (UTC) Re: The Hooded Figure Thank you for the feedback, I appreciate it. I may have to reconsider the ending. I had actually been worried that the story's payoff didn't match the initial setup and middle. So I'll have to think about that again. Gabemcceldry (talk) 03:14, July 19, 2016 (UTC) RE: M4R No need to apologise, mistakes happen to the best of us :) I was just removing the M4R as I got your message, it should be gone now. Have a good day :) | creepypasta.wikia.com | Underscorre talk - - | [[User:Underscorre|'Under']][[User talk:Underscorre|'Scorre']] }} 21:43, July 19, 2016 (UTC) JtK In the wake of your reviews of the 2011 and 2015 versions of Jeff, I was wondering if you'd consider taking a look at my own rewrite (also from the contest you participated in). I've had a couple folks say they liked it more than Bannings and am always curious to get feedback from people who hate the original. Not looking for a blog post or whatever (although that's cool if you do that) just a comment would be fine if you have the time. It's over on the spin pasta wiki: http://spinpasta.wikia.com/wiki/Jeff_the_Killer_Redux Shadowswimmer77 (talk) 04:32, January 22, 2017 (UTC) dear dr bleed I just wanted to say i like your reveus and well...i wanted you to revue my very recent story called "Happy end" it may end up deleted though idk so...be quick Makitstop (talk) 14:06, January 22, 2017 (UTC)mak ps. you seem very competent...good job ^Do not bother with that, I'm afraid that you won't be able to find that person's story anymore (on this wiki, at the very least). You bring the bodies, I handle the rest (talk) 14:15, January 22, 2017 (UTC) That's a shame. I always like to review a new author's stories. It's too bad he got in a fight with people. DoctorBleed (talk) 20:30, January 22, 2017 (UTC) Heads Up and a Sincere Apology If you're around, you've likely noticed the ongoing conversation on your Sonic.EXE 2 (Electric Boogaloo) review that has unfortunately turned into a dog pile. I temporarily locked the comments for a bit as I'm sure you want people focusing on your review and not carrying out a prolonged slap fight. I'll do my best to unlock the comments in a few hours when people have had a bit more time to reflect and get less heated. I'm very sorry for the inconvenience, but I also rather not let things get too ugly on either side. Thanks for understanding. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 15:48, January 22, 2017 (UTC) :I happen to be one of the 'dog pilers', my good sir, and I want to apologize for filling the your blog with irrelevant crap (I always do, but usually with funny crap). I do hope that the whole exchange entertained you in one way or another, though. :You bring the bodies, I handle the rest (talk) 16:06, January 22, 2017 (UTC) sonic.exe rewrite I just read this story and laughed my ass off. Kudos.--Mikemacdee (talk) 21:55, March 2, 2017 (UTC) EmpyrealInvective (talk) 20:08, June 29, 2017 (UTC) Deepest apologies. I understand what I did wrong and won't repeat the mistake. DoctorBleed (talk) 20:16, June 29, 2017 (UTC) :Thanks for understanding, that being said, the HPL (Lovecraft) and EAP (Edgar Allen Poe) categories fit as horror stories were more in their wheelhouse whereas Twain was more for satire so users are less likely to be searching for specific stories of his as opposed to authors like Bierce and Howard. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 20:20, June 29, 2017 (UTC) Boneless That comment was a reference to their troll pasta (which was deleted). As it has nothing to do with your story, I can remove it if you want. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 13:00, July 8, 2017 (UTC) Yeah, I figured that out last night. You should probably get rid of it. Doesn't really matter to me either way. DoctorBleed (talk) 20:53, July 8, 2017 (UTC) Your Very Own Category Hey, I just thought I'd let you know that we recently decided to create an author category for users who have 10+ stories posted on the wiki. Feel free to check out that link and message one of us admins/leave a post on the forum if you have any interest. Also, if you happen to know anyone who has 10+ stories on the wiki and meets the criteria, would ya mind dropping me a line as I'm drawing a bit of a blank? Have a good one. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 15:35, November 6, 2017 (UTC) :I got so friggin' scared when I saw an admin posted on my talk page, lol. Anyway, this is actually super great, I'm glad to have this. If I know anybody who has more than ten stories I'll let you know. DoctorBleed (talk) 16:10, November 6, 2017 (UTC) ::Yeah, most people do have that knee-jerk reaction (I try to ease that anxiety by typing out in all caps WARNING: THIS IS NOT A MESSAGE TO INFORM YOU THAT YOU"VE BEEN BANNED FOR RULE VIOLATIONS, but it doesn't seem to help much.). I can add the category now if you're up for it. Also, if you come across any users with ten or more stories, feel free to let us know. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 16:16, November 6, 2017 (UTC) :::Go right ahead! DoctorBleed (talk) 16:44, November 6, 2017 (UTC) :::And done. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 16:53, November 6, 2017 (UTC) * Night of the Shadow Man * That Awful Dripping Sound * Jacko the Very, Very Bad Clown * She Had to Be Perfect * I See Shadow People * It Opened * Bug Bites * Mother's Lunches * The Wandering Stranger * Cold Storage * The Elysium Project Thank you. --That One Machine I am a bot operated by Underscorre (talk) 17:15, August 22, 2018 (UTC) I'm actually in the process of writing a review right now. Your friendly neighborhood night owl. (talk) 01:07, September 5, 2018 (UTC) Re: I'm actually in the process of writing a review right now. Your friendly neighborhood night owl. (talk) 01:07, September 5, 2018 (UTC) They enjoyed your shadow man story can I narrate it for YouTube video? ZakBabyTV (talk) 07:14, March 10, 2019 (UTC) Check Overman Dr. Bleed, Check out your Overman. I went through it. I didn't focus on the English. Right now, I don't think it's ready for the Wiki. Doctor Bob Smith, MD, Specializing in Proctology. (talk) 04:10, September 22, 2019 (UTC) Story, "Jacko the Very, Very Bad Clown" Hello, My name is Paige Doetzel. I really enjoyed your story, "Jacko the Very, Very Bad Clown" and was wondering if you would grant me permission to create a ( short ) film adaption, in the future. I understand that this story is licensed under CC-BY-SA, but I still prefer to ask for permission anyway to get connected with the content creator. If you are interested, the film will be produced by my independent production, PDpictures; the story will be followed closely, and the original story will be credited to you. If you are not interested, then that is also fine. Just let me know. Thank you. PaigeDoetzel (talk) 00:19, November 14, 2019 (UTC) Thank you so much for asking permission! I would be honored if you made my story into a short film. Remember to credit me as "Anderson Steel." That's my pen name! But of course, I also want you to include my handle (DoctorBleed) so people can find me. DoctorBleed (talk) 12:12, November 14, 2019 (UTC)